Alvarado-Santos v. Department of Health

Filing 920100908

Opinion

var gAgent = navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase()
var gWindows = ( (gAgent.indexOf( "win" ) != -1 ) || ( gAgent.indexOf( "16bit" ) != -1 ) )
var gIE = ( gAgent.indexOf( "msie" ) != -1 )
var bInlineFloats = ( gWindows && gIE && ( parseInt( navigator.appVersion ) >= 4 ) )
var floatwnd = 0

var WPFootnote1 = ' During the period relevant to this case, the United States\
District Court for the District of Puerto Rico was exercising\
supervisory authority over the Correctional Health Services Program\
as well as other aspects of the Puerto Rican correctional system. \
This supervision is the result of "a long-running inmate class\
action" commonly known as the Morales Feliciano case, which dates\
back to 1979. Torres-Arroyo v. Rullan, 436 F.3d 1, 3 & n.1 (1st\
Cir. 2006) (citing district court and First Circuit opinions\
addressing the class action).\
'

var WPFootnote2 = ' The Admissions Centers were so-named because Admissions\
Center 308 could accommodate 308 inmates as patients, while the\
larger Admissions Center 705 could accommodate 705 inmates.\
'

var WPFootnote3 = ' As part of a pilot program, the Corrections Administration\
assigned a "medical cadre" to some, but not all, admissions\
centers.\
'

var WPFootnote4 = ' As a result of all of these changes, the number of female\
physicians assigned to shifts on the October schedule decreased. \
The original October shift schedule prepared by Guerrero before the\
transfer assigned shifts to two female physicians, Cuevas and\
another physician, Rivera; Rivera, however, chose not to continue\
working medical shifts after the move to Bayamón. The schedule\
prepared by Alvarado-Santos after the transfer assigned shifts to\
three female physicians, Cuevas, Diaz, and Pagan. The final\
schedule approved by Rodríguez-Pichardo assigned shifts to one\
female physician, Cuevas. \
'

var WPFootnote5 = ' Alvarado-Santos received notice that her contract would not\
be renewed at the end of May 2004. Rodríguez-Pichardo\'s comment\
was described at trial as having been made some time "after October\
1, 2003."\
'

var WPFootnote6 = ' Alvarado-Santos also points to other ways in which she felt\
that Rodríguez-Pichardo undermined her supervisory authority. For\
example, Rodríguez-Pichardo ordered some personnel working in\
Admission Centers 308 and 705 to report to a centralized supervisor\
rather than to their Admissions Director, and he did not invite\
Alvarado-Santos to attend all monthly staff meetings. There was no\
evidence presented at trial, however, that Alvarado-Santos was\
treated any differently than Devarie in these respects. \
'

var WPFootnote7 = ' Alvarado-Santos also observes that in revising the October\
shift schedule she had prepared, Rodríguez-Pichardo removed shifts\
from two female physicians and left only one female on the\
schedule, and argues that this suggests gender bias. As set forth\
in more detail earlier in this opinion, Alvarado-Santos altered the\
original October shift schedule prepared by Guerrero, removing\
regular shifts from several physicians and awarding shifts to two\
female physicians who had not had any shifts on the original\
schedule. After receiving complaints from several physicians,\
Rodríguez-Pichardo revised the October shift schedule so that it\
again resembled the original schedule, returning shifts to the\
complaining physicians. This sequence of events, given its history\
and the few parties involved, does not support an inference of\
gender bias. \
'

var WPFootnote8 = '  On her fourth point relating to the fact that Devarie went\
to a medical training program in New York while Alvarado-Santos did\
not, there is no explanation in the record for this distinction. \
Even unexplained, however, this single difference in treatment is\
far too insubstantial to support a claim of gender discrimination. \
'

var WPFootnote9 = ' Although she does not dispute that her Admissions Center had\
lower compliance levels than Devarie\'s, Alvarado-Santos argues that\
her supervisors\' reliance on these monthly compliance reports in\
making their decision to terminate her was unfair because for the\
first few months of her time in Bayamón, her center (unlike\
Devarie\'s) lacked certain equipment such as an x-ray machine and\
land-line phone service. At trial, however, Rodríguez-Pichardo\
offered unrebutted testimony that the compliance levels at\
Admissions Center 705 remained low even after the center was fully\
equipped with an x-ray machine and phone service, in early 2004. \
'

function WPShow( WPid, WPtext )
{
if( bInlineFloats )
eval( "document.all." + WPid + ".style.visibility = 'visible'" );
else
{
if( floatwnd == 0 || floatwnd.closed )
floatwnd = window.open( "", "comment", "toolbars=0,width=600,height=200,resizable=1,scrollbars=1,dependent=1" );
floatwnd.document.open( "text/html", "replace" );
floatwnd.document.write( "\r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( " p { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; } \r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( "\r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( WPtext );
floatwnd.document.write( 'Close');
floatwnd.document.write( "